Himachal Pradesh Court November 1973 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sukhvinder Kaur Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1973
Reported in: AIR1974HP35
Chet Ram Thakur, J. 1. This petition has been filed by Sukhvinder Kaur against an order refusing her admission in the Medical College.2. The petitioner passed her Matriculation Examination, from the Government Higher Secondary School, Sundernagar, which caters fbr the needs of various people residing in the town of Sundernagar and for the needs of neighbouring villages. The petitioner wanted to join the Medical College after doing her pre-Medical in the year 1969 but at that time she could not compete in order of merit in her own group. At that time, according to the terms of the prospectus cf the Medical College, B. Sc. students were given preference and this practice continued till the Session of 1970-71. Therefore, the petitioner did her B. Sc. securing 60.16 per cent marks in her compulsory subjects.3. For the Session 1971-72 the respondents issued a prospectus inviting applications for admission to the M. B. B. S. Course. The petitioner also applied. But the prospectus for the sai...
Mahesh Chand Vs. the State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1973
Reported in: AIR1974HP56
R.S. Pathak, C. J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit for declaration, damages and compensation.2. The case has had a chequered history and has passed through several stages which we need not detail here. It is unfortunate that it cannot be disposed of even now.3. In the judgment under appeal the learned District Judge has observed that the plaintiff did not press before him the point with regard to his removal from the management of the forest and that the only point argued was that even after his removal from the management he was entitled not only to a half share in the income of the forest produce but also to a half share in the income from the trees. The learned District Judge, therefore, confined himself to considering the latter claim alone. After consideration of the evidence on the record he found no substance in the claim.4. In second appeal before us, the first contention raised by learned Counsel for the plaintiff is that the learned District Judge ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›